I went back to the clip I used as part of the utterly one-sided parkinggod highlight reel. Chesson catches the ball and starts moving forward at 0:01.15 (my clip is at 30fps, so that's the one-and-a-half second mark). He crosses the goal line at 0:14.00 (this is probably not how video editing professionals indicate time, but I only learned enough video editing to mix utterly one-sided highlight reels. But I digress), so his total time is 12 seconds and 15 frames, or 12 1/2 seconds.

Obviously, to determine how fast he is, we need to know how far he went. Fortunately, we can make a pretty good approximation by assuming that he ran a straight line from where he caught the ball at the 4 to where he turned the corner at the 35 (he didn't, really; he moved more forward at first to set up his blocks), then a straight line from there to the goal line.

The numbers are two yards tall, and the top of the number is three yards in from the sideline (according to http://www.trumarkathletics.com/football-field-layout-dimensions.aspx). Chesson caught the ball almost exactly in the middle of the number, so he's 8 yards in from the sideline. When he turns the corner at the 35, he is also around the middle of the number, so he's 8 yards in from the sideline there as well. The field is 53 1/3 yards wide, so his lateral distance travelled is (53 1/3 - 8 - 8) 37 1/3 yards. His downfield distance travelled is (35 - 4) 31 yards, so we can solve for the distance he ran, which is just the hypotenuse of that right triangle: sqrt((31 * 31) + (37 1/3 * 37 1/3)) ~= 48.5yd.

Add the 65 yards from there to the goal line (he drifts another couple of yards towards the sideline as he went, but that's probably lost in the noise of all the other assumptions I made) and his total distance is 113.5 yards in 12.5 seconds, or an 'equivalent' 100m time of 12.05 seconds. Caveats about wearing pads/helmet/cleats and carrying a football all apply.

I'm back with a post-ANNIHILATION edition of these here power rankings. Those of you who like it when your fandom is validated by systems with numbers will undoubtedly enjoy this edition more than the last two, as I did. But more on that later...

First, a note on methodology. I won't rehash how this system works, but rather refer you to the explanation given last week. One note: I decided to implement the +/-0.5 weight for conference games. These are Big 10 power rankings, after all, so it didn't make sense to count Stanford and Michigan as equals in Northwestern's score. Here's how adding that bonus affected last week's standings:

Northwestern: 6.0

Iowa: 5.0

Ohio State 3.0

Michigan: 2.5

Michigan State: 1.5

Illinois: 1.0

Minnesota: 0.5

(tie) Wisconsin: -2.0

(tie) Penn State: -2.0

Indiana: -2.5

Maryland: -3.0

Nebraska: -4.5

(tie) Purdue: -5.0

(tie) Rutgers: -5.0

(So that MSU/Minnesota tie that made everyone feel icky? Not an issue anymore.)

Also note: in the interests of consistency, this will be the last methodological change implemented this season. Further suggestions will be considered in the offseason.

Post-Week 6 Rankings

1. Michigan (5-1 (2-0), AP #11): 6.5

(+ 3) As in most other systems that deliberately ignore preseason assumptions, this one now recognizes Michigan as the most accomplished Big 10 team. The Wolverines neither benefit from nor are penalized by any rescoring this week, outside the 0.5 conference win bonus now awarded for beating Maryland. But that win over Northwestern, which was ranked #17 in F+, is the single most valuable win by any Big 10 team so far this season (3.5). And what a win it was! Let's bask in its glory for a moment, and eagerly await Saturday's opportunity to add another.

2. Northwestern (5-1 (1-1), AP #20): 5.5

(-1) The good news for the Wildcats is that the 38-0 loss to Michigan doesn’t count against them (due to Michigan being classified as "good"), and thanks to previous, highly-scored victories over Stanford and Duke, they remain in second place. Besides, Northwestern isn’t out of the race for the Big 10 West, though—far from it. Though Iowa has the easier path, the ‘Cats have a chance to stake their claim when the two go head-to-head in Evanston next week. Lose, though, and it will be hard for Northwestern to recover.

3. Iowa (6-0/2-0, AP #17): 5.0

(-1) Iowa has impressed so far—with 4/6 of its wins scoring positively (and only the win over Illinois State producing a penalty). This might even be Kirk Ferentz’s best team since 2009, when they finished 11-2, won the Orange Bowl and ended the season ranked #7. But Iowa also has been gifted with an incredibly easy conference schedule. That won’t do many favors in these here power rankings, but after playing Northwestern next week, which looks like a tossup game right now, there aren't many bumps left in the road. A win on Saturday and it should be smooth sailing to the Big 10 title game.

4. Ohio State (6-0 (2-0), AP #1): 4.5

(-1) Last week's win against Maryland was at least less unimpressive, right? Right. But something's still wrong with the Buckeyes, and no one's quite sure what that is. an Interestingly, most observers see the previous week's close win over Indiana as indicative of Ohio State’s perplexing, yet lingering malaise. I tend to agree, but it actually helps the Buckeyes according to the rules of this system, as gave Indiana a boost in F+ (and thus leads to their reclassification as “solid,” which 1.0 points to the baseline and eliminates a 0.5 MoV penalty. Still, they'll need a quality win to boost their position here, and the weak schedule doesn't really offer that opportunity until the last two weeks (when they play MSU and Michigan back-to-back).

5. Michigan State (6-0 (2-0), AP #7): 3.5

(=) Another week, another near-loss against an inferior opponent—this time 31-24 over lowly Rutgers. I know there have been a lot of injuries, especially on the OL, but really it’s the defense that looks out of whack. And given how well Pitt has been playing, this *might* imply that Narduzzi was Fukunaga to Dantonio’s Pizzolato (albeit with a better working relationship). Take the former out of the equation, and you’re left with the True Detective: Season Two of Big 10 defenses. (For those paying close attention to the scores: this week the Spartans benefit from Central Michigan moving up from “not good” to “solid” last week. That adds 1.0 points to the baseline score and eliminates a -0.5 MoV penalty for a total swing of 1.5, which is a lot at this early stage.)

6. Wisconsin (4-2 (1-1), NR): 1.0

(+2) The Badgers scored 0.0 from their non-conference schedule, which was three cupcakes plus Alabama. Then the home loss against Iowa deducts a point, while the win at Nebraska (which F+ had at #34, if you can believe that) adds two. Still very much in the hunt for the West, though at this point I’d be surprised if they actually pull it off.

7. Minnesota (4-2 (1-1), NR): 0.5

(=) Minnesota beat up a bad Purdue team. That’s good? But Colorado State has been downgraded from “solid” to “not good” (which means the small MoV negates the road win bonus). That’s bad. Still, at least Ohio is “solid.” That’s good! The frogurt is also cursed….that’s bad.

7. Illinois (4-2 (1-1), NR): 0.5

(-1)

Huh…turns out Middle Tenessee is “solid” this week, so that’s something positive.

9. Penn State (5-1 (2-0), NR): 0.0

(=) The Nittany Lions are our perfectly average team of the week, at 0.0 (having played two conference doormats negates a -1.0 MoV penalty for unconvincing wins over “not good” opponents). So I guess that’s progress for a team that looked like it might be one of the doormats itself just a couple weeks ago. The problem for PSU is that there aren’t a lot of likely wins left on the schedule—away at Maryland and home versus Illinois probably, but the rest (OSU, Northwestern, Michigan and MSU) are all playing above PSU’s pay grade right now. A 6 or 7 win season seems likely, even with 5 already in the bag. If that happens, then 2016 is a do-or-die season for James Franklin.

10. Maryland (2-4 (0-2), NR): -2.5

(+1) Despite a 2-4 (0-2) record, a 3-game losing streak and the coach getting fired, Maryland’s score is surprisingly not awful--and even helped them move up one spot. Why? Because 3/4 losses came to “good” teams (WVU, Michigan, OSU), and this system does not penalize for blowout losses to “good” teams.

11. Indiana (4-2 (0-2), NR): -3.5

(-1) Indiana demonstrates why the transitive property has limited application to college football: one week after almost upsetting AP #1 Ohio State, the Hoosiers get shellacked by Penn State. That’s like almost beating a Porsche 918 in a drag race, and then getting smoked by a Toyota Corolla.

12. Nebraska (2-4 (0-2), NR): -6.5

(=) Death by a thousand cuts.

12. Rutgers (2-3 (0-2), NR): -6.5

(+1) Getting Carroo back certainly helps, to the degree that a very fast kid with a bucket and access to a garden hose can help fight a raging warehouse fire. Also, Rutgers should get a boost next week: since opponent strength is based on last week’s F+ ranking, Washington State is still classified as “not good” (#94). That might change after WSU beat Oregon (i.e. MSU's "quality OOC win"). Look out, Nebraska!

14. Purdue (1-5 (0-2), NR): -7.5

(-1) Like Indiana, the Boilermakers took their best shot at one of the conference’s wobbly fat cats (MSU in this case)—only to get destroyed the following week by the congressman from average (losing 41-13 to Minnesota). This team is bad.

Summary Stats

Mean: 0.0 (woohoo!)

Median: 0.5

Range: 14 (-7.5 to 6.5)

Observations

This week's changes were more incremental than last time. Michigan vaulted into the top spot, Wisconsin clawed its way back into positive territory and Indiana took a dive, but otherwise things look more or less the same.

Of the games being played this Saturday, none are likely to really shake things up. Michigan or Michigan State will benefit greatly from a win, but the loser won't give up too much ground (seeing as how both are in the top 25 of F+). A PSU upset of OSU would be something, but does anyone see that happening, even considering OSU's malaise? I don't.

As far as our game goes, well, I'm fairly confident we're going to win. I know, I know--they've had our number for years. But our defense is better than their offense, and our offensive staff should be able to figure out their declining defense. But I wouldn't be shocked if we lost either--they were highly rated preseason for a reason, after all, and Dantonio is a very capable and motivated coach. Still, I'm thinking 27-17 to the good guys, or something like that. Maybe not even that close.

One final note: I'm going out of town this weekend, so I'm unlikely to do one of these next week. Might still happen, but in all likelihood I'll wait for the bye week. GO BLUE!